Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Transportation News

Boeing Aims To Bring Flying Cars To Asia By 2030 (nikkei.com) 84

Posted by msmash from the PSA dept.
U.S. aircraft manufacturer Boeing plans to enter the flying car business in Asia by 2030, looking to tap demand for the fast travel the vehicles could provide in the region's traffic-choked cities. Nikkei: Boeing Chief Technology Officer Todd Citron revealed the plans in an interview with Nikkei. The company is developing electric vertical take-off and landing (eVTOL) craft at subsidiary Wisk Aero. The aircraft will adopt autonomous technology, rare among eVTOL craft. The plan is to first obtain certification in the U.S. before expanding into Asia. Details of the Asia business will be finalized in the future, including whether Boeing will sell the aircraft to companies aiming to provide eVTOL transportation services or operate the services itself.

Boeing is currently considering which country in Asia to enter first, including Japan. In Japan, domestic startup SkyDrive and Germany's Volocopter are scheduled to operate air taxi services at the 2025 Osaka World Expo. Boeing opened a research and development base in Nagoya on Thursday. It first established R&D operations in Japan in 2022 but had been renting space from other companies until now.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Boeing Aims To Bring Flying Cars To Asia By 2030 More

Boeing Aims To Bring Flying Cars To Asia By 2030

Comments Filter:

  • Stop (Score:5, Funny)

    by WankerWeasel ( 875277 ) on Thursday April 18, 2024 @02:24PM (#64405786)

    They're struggling to keep their planes in the air right now, much less cars.

  • Will the doors fall off? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Major_Disorder ( 5019363 ) on Thursday April 18, 2024 @02:24PM (#64405788)
    No doors could be a winning strategy. Imagine the weight savings.

  • Comment removed (Score:3)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Thursday April 18, 2024 @02:25PM (#64405792)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • Yes, but they won't be a hindrance much longer, just as soon as the doors randomly come off.

    • 6 years seems pretty ambitious, is Japan's FAA onboard?

      Nah, they know better than to be onboard a Boeing...

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      Japan has a long history of taking issue with VTOL aircraft, specifically US military ones stationed at bases in the country. There have been some accidents and the public isn't fond of them.

      Flying cars will never happen unless someone invents anti-gravity, because of the noise. And again, noise from US air bases and VTOL aircraft in particular is a long standing issue over there.

    • 6 years seems pretty ambitious, is Japan's FAA onboard?

      This is the "Amazon will use delivery drones", and "Uber is developing self driving taxis" announcement. It's nothing more than pointless bullshit appeasing investors and shareholders who want to see someone say the word "innovation". Nothing will come of it.

      The flying car is DOA. The costs of license alone, the lack of space for takeoff and landing as well puts this out of reach for everyone who doesn't already have a helicopter. You don't need to even ask if the JCAB are onboard with this. It won't even g

  • LMAO (Score:3, Funny)

    by TheSlashdotHunter ( 10317841 ) on Thursday April 18, 2024 @02:26PM (#64405796)
    With doors that fly off? Or tires that fall off? Or engines that catch on fire? I'll take 3 please!

    • Good choice!
      Chances are only ne of them has all 3 problems, and the other two only one. So you switch parts on the other two and are good!

  • I look to movies of my childhood like Back to the Future as more or less aligning my expectations of what the 21st century would be.

    The adult in my is a little afraid, the kid in me is still a little disappointed. What ever happened to hover boards and rehydrated pizzas from those movies? I kind of thought the kids from our generation would be running things by now...

  • Meanwhile... here far away from Aisa... nonsense. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by gavron ( 1300111 ) on Thursday April 18, 2024 @02:35PM (#64405836)

    We just want Boeing to make planes that stay in the sky, don't drop doorholes, engines keep going, etc.

    But I get it. The US market is no longer eager for Boeing's crappy product so they're going to try and unload it in Asia.

    Flying cars.

    Serioously.

    What a bunch of nonsense.

    • At least now, a search for Boeing headlines will have one that makes them look like a major industry player, rather than a posterboy for enshittification.

      Boeing airspeed indicator tricks flight crew into crashing plane.
      Boeing batteries catch fire, forcing an emergency landing
      Boeing jet makes emergency landing after depressurizing due to an unsecured air plug
      Boeing plane grounded after engine cowling falls of on runway.
      Boeing management announces mass resignations to be effective much later this year.
      B

      • Boeing airspeed indicator tricks flight crew into crashing plane.

        I believe you mean the angle-of-attach indicator was causing a crash.

        Ever since the Boeing 737 Original there was a process for runaway trim stabilizer, a process that evolved over time some but ended up becoming standardized as toggling off two switches and operating the trim by a manual crank. The 737 Original an 737 Classic were apparently light enough aircraft that a single pilot of moderate strength could operate this crank with relative ease. The two switches were to disable the manual yoke trim adj

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by dgatwood ( 11270 )

          Boeing airspeed indicator tricks flight crew into crashing plane.

          I believe you mean the angle-of-attach indicator was causing a crash.

          I AOA Disagree. :-D

          But seriously, yeah, it was Airbus that had airspeed sensor problems (pitot tubes).

        • I am honored that my mistake in a stupid joke post inspired such an informative reply.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by bn-7bc ( 909819 )
        Wile certainly concerning, how many incidents/oassanger mile id S the avarahe for long distance busses, we need some scale to compare here. This is in no way an excuse for shitty qc/qa at boeing

    • The US market is no longer eager for Boeing's crappy product so they're going to try and unload it in Asia.

      Where have you been? They don't need to unload it - they just fly it over Asia and it unloads itself!

  • I doubt that they manage.. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by luvirini ( 753157 ) on Thursday April 18, 2024 @02:35PM (#64405838)

    Boeing seems to be a company that would need manufacturing and engineering focus, but have an economy focus instead.

    All the problems they have had are a symptom of trying to maximize short term profits in an industry where the product is safety crtical. That has never ended well.

    I hope that one of the other airplane makers can make a breakthrough to the most common plane segments, as else soon the situation will be bad with a monopoly by Airbus. Monopolies tend to go badly for the users in the long run too..

  • I see their plan (Score:5, Funny)

    by systemd-anonymousd ( 6652324 ) on Thursday April 18, 2024 @02:46PM (#64405860)

    The only way Boeing could make flying cars is if they build conventional cars and fuck it up

  • is boeing okay? (Score:3)

    by zeiche ( 81782 ) on Thursday April 18, 2024 @02:50PM (#64405868)

    not sure if boeing management has noticed, but they should check in with the folks who pay to fly on their machines. i hear trust in their product is waning. is now a good time to announce a new product line?

  • It will be interesting... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by kpainter ( 901021 ) on Thursday April 18, 2024 @03:02PM (#64405892)
    It will be interesting to see how they can take the 737 fuselage and transform it into a car. You know they aren't going to do a completely new design in the interest of cost savings.

  • A flying car is simply a car in the air. Strap a few cars to the various 7x7 models, get to cruising altitude, pull release handle. Viola', cars be flying! Landing? Boeing figures Lockheed can figure that part out.

  • Isn't it a little late for April Fools?

  • No troublesome doors to keep on.

  • Flying car? (Score:5, Informative)

    by laughingskeptic ( 1004414 ) on Thursday April 18, 2024 @03:34PM (#64405966)
    Do Boeing execs think that just because they are building the Wisk Aero VTOL airplanes in Japan, that they can call them flying cars? Cars do not have giant dangerous exposed propellers on them last I checked. These Wisk Aero VTOLs will be limited to helicopter landing pads and airports. There is nothing "flying car" about these machines other than Boeing's poorly thought through plan to make these "pilot optional". Can't wait to hear the chatter between these things and the towers.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Luckyo ( 1726890 )

      "Flying cars" seems to be the buzzword for "cheap helicopter replacements of the future".

      • Yeah, the use of buzzwords by CEOs always instills confidence. The Wisk Aeros look like small V-22 Ospreys, so I guess the Marines have had "Flying Buses" this whole time. :/

    • Can't wait to hear the chatter between these things and the towers.

      Can't wait to hear the chatter as these things hit the towers. FTFY.

  • You're a bit late [streetmusclemag.com] to the show.

  • April 1 came and went. It's April 18 now.

    Of course the VTOL development division can be a completely discrete entity from the commercial jet manufacturing side of the business. They may have no real overlap. They might have different cultures, with this R&D wing being much more healthy. They might be wildly capable of pulling this off.

    What needs to be acknowledged - and repaired - is the perception that currently weighs down the company. "Just trust us" requires capital that they put in a big pile and s

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by hawk ( 1151 )

      >Of course the VTOL development division can be a completely discrete
      >entity from the commercial jet manufacturing side of the business.

      [nods]

      Yes, ind of like they separate the doors and airframes now . . .

  • electric VTOL (Score:3)

    by manu0601 ( 2221348 ) on Thursday April 18, 2024 @04:15PM (#64406072)

    The company is developing electric vertical take-off and landing (eVTOL) craft

    Did they found an efficient way of storing electricity with little weight?

    • I can't see most of the article, but I can see in the picture that it's a vtol aircraft (with an airfoil) not a quadcopter. So, that helps.

      Compared to a helicopter, with a turbine engine and a long blade, this would have a very different noise profile with 4 electric motors each spinning a propeller. Hopefully not as loud? Or at least not at the low, long-traveling "thud thud thud" frequency of a helo?

  • When my neighbor leaves for work on his motorcycle it's a relatively minor rumble as he navigates his way from the cul-de-sac to the main road, sometimes it wakes me up but I'm used to it so it's a minor bother that lasts a few seconds, little more than a reminder on how long until my alarm clock will ring. If my neighbor had some "flying car" then the noise that would make would be waking people up for something like a half mile around. There's an interview with Elon Musk spelling out the noise problems

    • There's an interview with Elon Musk spelling out the noise problems of flying cars which makes them impractical. I mentioned Elon Musk's opinion on something elsewhere and the claim was Musk isn't a trusted source. Okay then, find different sources, ones you trust, and let me know what they expect in noise produced from private flying vehicles.

      Why the fuck did you need to consult Musk to learn that flying cars will make a racket? Anyone except an avid flying car fan could have told you that. Anyway, what special qualifications does Musk have on this subject that drew you to him? His cars don't fly.

      • I can't win here. If I point out what should be obvious, that aircraft make a lot of noise, then I'll have someone claim that it is just a problem we haven't solved yet. If I give the name of someone that would know that aircraft make noise, and that it is a problem that is not easily solved, then I'm told I somehow picked the "wrong" person as a source.

        Elon Musk came to mind as a source because I happened to see Musk in an interview where he was asked about the possibility of flying cars. In my original

  • Focus on fixing your planes first! If and when they grow safe, THEN you can play with Jetsons toys. You are already dancing with Chapter 11.

    Maybe they should check the water in the Executive Suite, seems all who enter lose IQ points, door bolts, or both.

  • I wonder whether this is a good idea, for several reasons. First, air traffic control and congestion is already a problem in many areas. Are we in a position to handle a significant increase in air traffic? Second, does this make sense in terms of use of energy and environmental impact? Third, if "flying cars" means vehicles more like cars than helicopters and airplanes, this presumably means vehicles that can also travel on roads. Is it possible to build vehicles that both provide adequate survivability of
    • To quote the article it's just a mislabeled airplane: "The company is developing electric vertical take-off and landing (eVTOL) craft at subsidiary Wisk Aero. The aircraft will adopt autonomous technology, rare among eVTOL craft."
  • ...and women, and children, and groceries, and...
  • Flying cars is a sci-fi techno-religious mythology that needs to die because it's inherently just too energy inefficient.

  • This is a cross between a helicopter and a Cessna

  • I will not take this unnecessary Wisk.

  • The vehicle pictured is not a "flying car" it can't drive on normal roads. Its a VTOL aircraft, similar use case to a helicopter.

    Separately from that I'm pretty skeptical about the eVTOL market in general. While a vertical lift vehicle doesn't need a full runway it will need the equivalent of a helipad, and will be quite noisy - not something you can land in your driveway in suburbia. That limits its use to the sorts of missions that helicopters fly now. It may end up being a less expensive helicopte

  • It's a type of helicopter.

  • The CTO's name is Citron? "Lemon"??? That guy must get ragged on about building lemons, making lemonade when you got lemons, that aircraft was a lemon, etc.. A LOT. Sucks to be him.

    That said there was news the other day of a new big real estate development in Tokyo that would have flying taxis. Meanwhile there already are helicopters in Tokyo and they are expensive, but have real live pilots. I'd prefer a human pilot putting his or her life on the line, or just you know use the really cheap automobile tax

  • ... or cars with parts flying off them?

  • That name seems apropos
    If Ford can do it why not Boeing?

  • They should team up with Tesla so their flying cars can be self-flying.

    Yeah, that's the ticket!
    (with apologies to Jon Lovitz)

Slashdot Top Deals

Don't tell me how hard you work. Tell me how much you get done. -- James J. Ling

Close